Is mandatory disclosure an effective consumer protection mechanism in Australian real estate markets? The perspective of Queensland industry experts
Miller, Evonne, Duncan, William D., Christensen, Sharon A., Corones, Stephen G., Round, David, Burdon, Mark, & Stickley, Amanda P. (2006) Is mandatory disclosure an effective consumer protection mechanism in Australian real estate markets? The perspective of Queensland industry experts. In Social Change in the 21st Century Conference, 2006, Brisbane.
This exploratory qualitative study investigates the reaction of the selling side of the real estate market to mandatory disclosure of information as a consumer protection mechanism in residential property transactions, the largest purchase most consumers will ever make. In Australia, where mandatory disclosure requirements for vendors, mortgage providers and real estate agents vary on a state by state basis from stringent to no formal legal information requirements, little is known about the relative effectiveness of different disclosure regimes or whether the red tape and compliance costs of disclosure may outweigh the benefits. To address this research gap, in-depth interviews were conducted with five Queensland industry experts (lawyers, real-estate agents, mortgage provider). These interviews highlight the transaction costs and benefits of disclosure from the perspective of the supply side of the market, and raise questions about the perceived legal, economic and social effectiveness of mandatory consumer protection mechanisms in the Australian real estate market. Future research directions are outlined in light of these preliminary findings.
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Conference Paper|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > STUDIES IN HUMAN SOCIETY (160000) > SOCIOLOGY (160800) > Social Change (160805)|
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Property Law (excl. Intellectual Property Law) (180124)
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > STUDIES IN HUMAN SOCIETY (160000) > SOCIOLOGY (160800) > Applied Sociology Program Evaluation and Social Impact Assessment (160801)
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law|
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2006 (The authors)|
|Deposited On:||22 Oct 2007|
|Last Modified:||29 Feb 2012 23:23|
Repository Staff Only: item control page